I may be the only non-Canadian following this "free trade under the Canadian constitution" case, but it's really kind of fascinating. Here's a report of some testimony from the hearing:
A professor of political history testifying at a hearing over the right to buy beer in another province says the Fathers of Confederation wanted Canada to be a united country with unfettered trade.
Andrew Smith of the University of Liverpool in England is considered the key defence witness in the case of a New Brunswick man charged with illegally importing alcohol from Quebec.
Gerard Comeau of Tracadie is fighting the charge on constitutional grounds.
An agreed statement of facts says he was caught in October 2012 with 14 cases of beer and three bottles of liquor that he had bought in nearby Pointe-a-la-Croix.
The New Brunswick Liquor Control Act limits anyone from having more than 12 pints of beer not sold by a provincially licensed liquor outlet.
The defence argues that a section of the Liquor Control Act is unconstitutional because Section 121 of the Constitution Act says all goods from a province are to be admitted free into each of the other provinces.
“Admitted free means of all impediments,” Smith told the court Wednesday.
Smith said his study of history shows the Fathers of Confederation wanted free trade within the provinces.
“There was general acceptance of the need for free trade and a consensus for economic union,” he said.
Defence lawyer Mikael Bernard said it was important to have Smith explain to the court what the Fathers of Confederation intended.
“Let’s go back to 1864, 1863, 1865, 1866 and 1867 to find out what were their intentions were, not just read the piece of paper as it stands today. Let’s put everything into context,” Bernard said.
Any of you Canadians out there with more details on the proceeding, feel free to post them in the comments!
